Durant

Normally I would rant about the destruction in Lubbock last night, but that's for another day. Mostly I am wondering about the benefit of forcing kids to attend a year of school prior to entry into the NBA. Though I would agree with the proposition that most kids aren't ready and are just in it for the bucks, isn't that the reason most of us would seek employment?

Kevin Durant is a man. He plays the game better than just about everyone in the country (as evidenced by his 15-29, 37 point, 23 rebound game last night). Is he better than most in the NBA? Maybe not, but he would hold his own. If he ends up with a career ending injury this year (extreme hypothetical obviously), then he has been deprived of serious bucks because of a blatantly discriminatory NBA rule (which theoretically has the power to enact whatever rules they want). Perhaps the NBA should quit using the colleges as a testing ground and actually put money into the developmental leagues. Then when there is a question regarding somebody's ability to hoop it up, there is a place for them. Under current rules, these athletes are forced to stumble through a year of college hoops and all the accompanying pitfalls. The NBA can minimize the financial side of this by simply writing better contracts, ones which enable high school cagers to get paid reasonably (versus the ridiculous sums thrown out to the likes of Kwame Brown).

It seems to me the NBA is telling the world we are so irresponsible that we cannot control our checkwriting ability. Though the country (and the world) may be ready to see Greg Oden and Kevin Durant hoop it up against NBA talent, the entry level flops (think Kwame Brown again), prohibit that. Strong developmental leagues would remedy this by giving Kwame a forum to improve while simeaultaneously allowing the ready for prime time Durant the ability to earn a dime. Isn't this what baseball has been doing for a century?

The obvious counterargument is that younger NBA stars create a less than stellar product. Agreed, thus the need for the developmental league. Another counterargument might be the dilution in the college game had become too much and the increased interest of having the Durants in college helps all college students by bringing income to the universities. Perhaps, but baseball faces the same problem, and has marketed the College World Series amazingly well in the past ten years. And does the NBA really care about that anyway? Seriously, wouldn't the NBA steal March Madness if they could? David Stern, Darth Vader himself?

Why am I writing this? Because I'm hooked on Durant and am pissed off he's only going to be a Longhorn for one year. Better not to have him the first place? Perhaps. Or better for him to ply his wares with reimbursement versus living in Jester Hall. Definitely.